Again, I encourage you to read Obama's books so that you will have a greater insight into what I am trying to explain to you. Also, Clinton's monetary policies were very different from Obama's.
Controlling primaries to get rid of radical idiots like Florida's Alan Grayson is one of the prime reasons for influencing which primary candidates win. If the Democratic and Republican parties have moderates running against each other, the nation wins. So, I'm happy to help.
The Liberal base is too intelligent to allow opportunist Tea Partiers into progressive reform. We're about moving forward, not taking two steps back. I don't see it. We have little in common, in terms of our way of life and perception of the world.
I think it is sort of a cop out to tell someone to go read a book when they are challenging one of your positions. If there are ideas in your head there should be accompanying reasons for holding those ideas that you should be able to communicate to someone you are talking to. I have gotten information from many books that have informed my opinions, but I can typically discuss this information in the process of supporting my positions. Also, I think Obama's monetary policies are very similar to Clinton's. I am curious how you see them so radically different to constitute describing Obama as a radical leftist. Edit -- just to be clear, the reason I don't support Obama is because he is not a leftist, but is instead a corporate backed right of center moderate. I am very curious how you can see him so different than I do.
there is no inherent virtue in moderation views are either good or bad, right or wrong, regardless of where they fall on the electoral spectrum This obsession with bipartisanship and moderation is revolting. Give people a choice, not an echo. Just say no to group think.
Thumbs you seem like a nice guy and genuine in your beliefs but frankly I am not sure you understand what "Left" means. Just taking what you are saying as on face value doesn't make Obama more left than Johnson. That said if you think Obama is more of a wealth distributor than LBJ I would suggest comparing what taxes were like when LBJ was president versus what they are now.
I think Obama would like to be as left as LBJ (if not more), but he 1) doesn't have the political power or electoral makeup to do so, and 2) doesn't have the desire to do the heavy lifting required to achieve such a circumstance.
If you're political ideology is sponsored, funded, & managed by a corporate oligarchy, anyone more moderate than George Wallace is going to be considered a leftist. Understood.
The ACA is molded after a plan from the Heritage Foundation and Dole (among others on the right,) and made law in Massachussets by a republican governor. But if Obama does it, it's this crazy wacko lurch to the left. You'll notice that most of the libs in this thread are supportive of Tea Partiers participating in primaries. It's just this silly accusation about Obama being some radical lefty that nobody is buying, and points to a mindset that doesn't gel with the "me & the Tea Party are just ordinary Americans who want freedom" shtick. Obama has been president for FIVE YEARS. Don't point us to a book written before he was elected. That's weak. We have years of governance and policy to judge. Look at the differences in tax code between now and LBJ, or Nixon. The claim that Obama is a radical lefty is not supported by the evidence.
And I still want to know why, if the Tea Party is only about small government, the Constitution, and liberty- why haven't you all flocked to the Libertarian party, which for generations has developed infrastructure and ran credible alternative candidates who support EXACTLY these values?
basic game theory primaries are the way to achieve limited government candidates, not general election vote splitting
That could be possible considering that he is on record saying his preference is for a single payer system. I don't think this is a matter of heavy lifting just a recognition that the country is far different than it was in the 1960's.
rj - I'll break down the anatomy of this troll for you so you can be more easily trolled by ur bro thumbs & save everyone times and monies: Leftiness: LBJ (wanted to help the negro) < Obama (the negro) Hopefully this representation won't make Thumbs Jarvik-7 stop.
If there is a new force coming in the Democratic Party it will be leftist. There is a growing realization among the general population that their government and their narrative is being controlled by the oligarchy. But much like the revolutionary pamphleteers, the internet is a populist medium that is much harder to control than the corporate news. Also, it's becoming more evident that the religions message is being exploited for monetary gain. What passes for Christianity in America today is a moneyed, bigoted, exclusionary perversion of the message of Christ and the new Testament. The most subversive man on the Planet right now is the new Pope. I think the trend for the 2020's will be a new left composed of religious Christians, Populist, Environmentalist and Anti-corporatist that exploit the internet for a real, inclusive grass roots movement that realizes that the power of numbers and voting can change a democratic system.
Right, and Obama is not going to make a sustained intellectual argument to move the country to that point. He doesn't have that in him. As opposed to a Reagan or Woodrow Wilson or Rand Paul or Elizabeth Warren.
